3 ms·

Doesn't flash storage need to be plugged in occasionally, or else it suffers data loss from the cell charges dissipating? I thought a mechanical hard drive was

by wds 2y ago

Doesn't flash storage need to be plugged in occasionally, or else it suffers data loss from the cell charges dissipating? I thought a mechanical hard drive was the go-to consumer-level way to backup long-term (tapes being higher but harder).

downrightmike 2y ago
Something like once every ten years
- kiwijamo 2y ago
  I've had flash drives go bad after months or even weeks so I'm dubious about your ten years claim. Probably depends on the type of flash chip, quality, etc but still overall worse than the alternatives.
  - downrightmike 2y ago
    high quality is the key 2023: https://www.pcworld.com/article/2037550/how-long-does-data-last-usb-flash-drive.html#:~:text=The%20lifespan%20of%20data%20on,10%20years%20or%20even%20longer https://www.pcworld.com/article/2037550/how-long-does-data-l....
nytesky 2y ago
So a physical hard drive is better long term archival storage than SDD?
- bravetraveler 2y ago
  Depends on what you're going against, I'd wager. Mechanical HDDs are far more shock sensitive. One good drop and the bits are physically damaged by the head hitting the platter. If you move often perhaps USB SSDs are better. A little more rugged and accessible, with occasional power as the trade-off. The cell powering is overstated. I just wouldn't expect to go a really long time on your only drive. Have many/play the odds. Reading the data occasionally to verify sums would suffice to recharge. So could appending to the archive! Tape is great for density and shock sensitivity, but doesn't handle magnetism or moisture as well. Random access is awful, so recovering from this may be as well. This really shines in terms of density. All this to say, I wouldn't store data I cared about in a hard to access or irregular place. Not all the same place, but readily accessible such that restoring, maintenance, or establishing quorum is feasible. A safe deposit box sounds nice, is wildly impractical. The houses of friends or family are just as effective, or misc. S3 providers. Many is best, in short. Not just one.

by wds 2y ago

downrightmike 2y ago

Something like once every ten years

kiwijamo 2y ago
I've had flash drives go bad after months or even weeks so I'm dubious about your ten years claim. Probably depends on the type of flash chip, quality, etc but still overall worse than the alternatives.
- downrightmike 2y ago
  high quality is the key 2023: https://www.pcworld.com/article/2037550/how-long-does-data-last-usb-flash-drive.html#:~:text=The%20lifespan%20of%20data%20on,10%20years%20or%20even%20longer https://www.pcworld.com/article/2037550/how-long-does-data-l....

nytesky 2y ago

So a physical hard drive is better long term archival storage than SDD?

bravetraveler 2y ago
Depends on what you're going against, I'd wager. Mechanical HDDs are far more shock sensitive. One good drop and the bits are physically damaged by the head hitting the platter. If you move often perhaps USB SSDs are better. A little more rugged and accessible, with occasional power as the trade-off. The cell powering is overstated. I just wouldn't expect to go a really long time on your only drive. Have many/play the odds. Reading the data occasionally to verify sums would suffice to recharge. So could appending to the archive! Tape is great for density and shock sensitivity, but doesn't handle magnetism or moisture as well. Random access is awful, so recovering from this may be as well. This really shines in terms of density. All this to say, I wouldn't store data I cared about in a hard to access or irregular place. Not all the same place, but readily accessible such that restoring, maintenance, or establishing quorum is feasible. A safe deposit box sounds nice, is wildly impractical. The houses of friends or family are just as effective, or misc. S3 providers. Many is best, in short. Not just one.